Tuesday, January 27, 2015

OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL | Oakland Civil Rights icon Elaine Brown called Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley a racist at a special session of the Oakland City Council last Saturday.

The meeting's sole agenda item was a lengthy discussion on the strained relationship between law enforcement and the black community.

During a public comment period, Brown, who was the first woman to lead the Black Panther Party in the 1970s, lashed out at O’Malley for her decisions to not prosecute police officers who had killed black men while in the line of duty.

“There’s a person absent from the room and that’s Nancy O’Malley," Brown told the council. “Nobody—I don’t get why no one wants to talk about this racist Nancy O’Malley?”

Other speakers publicly questioned why O’Malley was not in attendance Saturday afternoon, which was attended by other public officials in the county.

Assistant District Attorney Teresa Drenick said, O’Malley was preparing for a gala in her honor. O’Malley received the Alameda County Citizen of the Year award Saturday.

But, Brown continued, calling for O’Malley to prosecute BART police officer Anthony Pirone for his role in the the death of Oscar Grant and Oakland police officer Miguel Masso for the killing of Alan Blueford.

Brown also called for the prosecution of the officer who killed Lovelle Mixon, even though the suspect killed four Oakland police officers following a traffic stop in 2009. After a large-scale manhunt, police killed Mixon.

“Whom you would call a killer, but I would assert was murdered by the police because we don’t know anything that happened to Lovelle Mixon, exactly,” said Brown. “It’s a little secret everybody has and nobody wants to talk about.”

O’Malley’s office did not respond to Brown’s comment about racism, but said, “D.A. O’Malley has dedicated her adult life to empowering those who have been voiceless in the justice system. D.A. O’Malley’s tireless work on behalf of crime victims and the citizens of Alameda County speaks for itself. ” said Drenick. “If Ms. Brown would like to know more about the work of the District Attorney and the Office she leads, we would be more than happy to show her.”

Immediately following Brown’s short remarks, former Assemblymember Nancy Skinner spoke next and addressed Brown. “Thank you for your thoughts and for making it real.”

7 comments:

Here's the rundown on Lovelle Mixon, courtesy Wikipedia: The assailant was identified as Oakland resident Lovelle Mixon, age 26, who worked sporadically as a plumber and custodian.[17] Mixon wielded two different weapons—a 9mm semiautomatic handgun and an SKS rifle—during his deadly assaults on the Oakland police officers.[1]

Mixon had an extensive criminal history. Beginning at age 13, he was arrested multiple times for battery, and by age 20 was serving a Corcoran state prison sentence following a felony conviction for assault with a deadly weapon and armed robbery in San Francisco. After he was paroled, Mixon went in and out of prison. When the shootings happened, he was living in East Oakland at his grandmother's house and was wanted on a no-bail arrest warrant for violating his current parole conditions. On March 20, 2009, the day before the shootings, the Oakland Police Department learned that Mixon was linked by DNA to the February 5, 2009 rape of a 12-year-old girl who was dragged off the street at gunpoint in the East Oakland neighborhood where Mixon's sister lived. On May 4, 2009 a state laboratory confirmed not just this link, but also confirmed that Mixon robbed and raped two young women about seven hours before the shootings. Investigators said that Mixon may have committed several other rapes during recent months, although no convictions or indictments had been secured before his death.[4] Had Mixon been arrested for his parole violation, he would have faced at most six months in prison; if convicted of rape, he faced a life sentence.

Mixon had also been the primary suspect in a previous murder case; however, due to lack of evidence he had been charged only with lesser violations: possession of drug paraphernalia, forgery, identity theft, attempted grand theft, and receiving stolen property.[18][19]

That's really funny the accusation that Nancy O'Malley is supposedly a racist. More specifically, in order to be a racist O"Malley would need to have a definite philosophy.

However, and just like most prominent liberals, and especially most prominent Bay area liberals, O'Malley has no coherent and consistent philosophy and/or consistent political point of view other than usually striving to be politically correct and almost always striving to be a member of the fad of the month club.

However if someone was to accuse O'Malley of being a wishy washy idiot, I would be the first to agree.

How dare you make insulting remarks about Nancy O;Malley. More specifically, O'Malley is a California lawyer, and therefore is licensed by, "regulated" by, and "monitored" by the California State Bar, in other words the totally corrupt organization that pretends: one, to set standards for lawyers; and two, that supposedly its primary purpose for existence is to protect the general public from lawyers who are corrupt and/or incompetent.

As a followup to my previous post of 2:57PM in which I accused the California State Bar of being a corrupt, and also basically useless and worthless, organization, Nadia Lockyer, in other words Bill Lockyer's wife, is still in good standing with the CSB, and even though Nadia Lockyer is one of the most extreme cases in the entire country of an extreme mental retard, drug addict, and professional pathological liar, and therefore not only not qualified to practice law but not even to be a minimum wage employee at a fast food joint.

However according to the totally corrupt CSB, Nadia Lockyer is "qualified" to practice "law."

NOTE: To confirm that Nadia Lockyer is in good standing with the totally corrupt CSB, go to its website, in other words "calsb.org."

As part of its charade that supposedly it is committed to protecting the general public from being ripped off by lawyers who are incompetent and/or corrupt and/or drug addicts, the CSB does now and then openly and publicly discipline, and sometimes even disbar, a few of the lower ranking and less politically connected lawyers that have California law licenses.

However usually lawyers who are more powerful and/or politically connected can repeatedly break every rule in the book before the totally corrupt CSB even slightly considers openly, publicly, and strongly disciplining them.